.SI F46 






V. '''^^ A^ ' /.^%^^'^ ^^^^ c'^ 



'^ -^^^^ 



V . ' • o 

r'-W 



L*r 
















-^ 



^ ^-^^r^ 
























■- '-^^O^ !- 



* .K 



^^°^ 








— (J- 



'^ 






>u 



<J> * o « o ^ ■( 



."^ 




Ij.^ »<% 




DID 



THE FIRST CHURCH OF SALEM 



ORIGINALLY HAVE 



A CONFESSION OF FAITH 



DISTINCT FROM THEIR 



C0VENANT1 



BY JOSEPH B. FELT. 



" As in building, if the line 

Be not exact and strait ; the rule dei^line ; 

Or level false, how vain is the design '. "— LncRETlus. 

" To lead us safe through Error's thorny maze, 
Reason exerts her pure ethereal rays."— B'enion. 



BOSTON: 

PRESS OF EDWAED L. BALCH, 21 SCHOOL STREET. 
18 5 6. 






%^ ^^ 



<j' 



^• 



^* 



5o052 






.^^^ 




^\ ^^ wAsm^ 



THE 



FIEST CHURCH OF SALEM. 



A FEW days since, a tract came to my hands with the title : " A 
Brief Sketch of a Lecture, delivered before the Essex Institute, May 
12, 1856, respecting the Founders of Salem and the First C^hurch." 
The author of this work is the Hon. Daniel A. AYhite, It remarks : 
" The main purpose of the lecture was to correct certain errors, con- 
tained in two recent publications ; — the Ecclesiastical History, by Mr. 
Felt, and a new edition of Morton's Memorial." The writer of the 
History regrets, that, some of its contents being thus represented, he 
feels himself obligated to clear the volume from such a charge. In 
the pursuit of this object, we will, for the sake of lessening words and 
saving time, as well as avoiding personal remarks, personify the Sketch 
or Tract and the Book or Volume, and have the discussion, as it were, 
carried on between them. 

It may be well to state here the bill of indictment on which the 
Book is so arraigned. On its 1 1 5th page, there is a note, saying, that 
the covenant of 1629 differed from that of 1636. On the 116th, the 
original confession of faith and covenant " were evidently not contained 
together in one document, but were separately and individually acknow- 
ledged." On the 267th, after an allusion to Peters' settlement, as 
Pastor, it is observed, " They renew their covenant, somewhat altered 
from the first. It evidently had reference to events of the time." 
Then four extracts from it are adduced, and their application men- 
tioned, as bearing on several occurrences. This, as the author of these 
positions feels assured, is a fair representation. It is what, as already 
expressed, the Sketch denominates errors, and soon after, misrepresenta- 
tion. In addition to this, the Tract, on p. 6, referring to the aforesaid 
extracts, observes, " Yet in the" Book, '"it (the covenant) found no 
place, excepting some mutilated sentences, introduced apparently to 



disprove its authority." In the nest sentence, it intimates, that such 
treatment of the covenant is unworthy and " perversive of its true 
character." This seems to have been honestly considered as a needed 
blister to quicken the perception of truth. But we trust that, on 
fuller examination, no sufficient morbidness will appear, requiring any 

such remedy. We will now endeavor to show that the preceding 

positions of the Volume are correct, and therefore neither errors nor 
misrepresentation, nor unworthiness, nor perversion. To do this, the 
general divisions, for the most part, adopted by the Sketch, may answer 
our purpose. 

I. The avowed principles of the Founders. 

It is an indisputable fact, in moral as well as intellectual philosophy, 
that principles will be accounted opinions, and so in the reverse com- 
parison, according to the medium of faith through which they are 
viewed. As in astronomical science, the power of the sun to attract 
all the less globes of its system was a grand principle with Coper- 
nicus, while his opponents denounced it as the vagary of imagination, 
so it is with the receivers and rejectei'S of the great doctrines of reli- 
gion. The Founders of Naumkeag highly estimated their practical 
principles of Congregationalism. But they looked on them, in contrast 
with their principles of Christianity, as the shell to the kernel and 
the husk to the corn. They could easily discern the difference between 
these two kinds of principles, and quickly distinguish them both from 
the loose speculations which drift with ever}^ wind. As the decision 
of their judgment, the principles of religion embalmed in their hearts, 
were drawn from the wisdom of Inspiration. Could they rise from the 
dead, and address those who greatly applaud them for doing what they 
never did, for lightly esteeming the doctrines which they held far 
more valuable than all worldly honor, they would say to them, How- 
ever earnest you are, we count such praise as our reproach, and such 
glory as our shame. They had no need to be taught, that a reformed 
church could no more dwell in peace, and long exist together in pros- 
perity, without a specification of its doctrines, than a free state or a 
kingdom could, without the declaration of its constitutional principles. 

What, then, w^re the doctrines or principles of these founders ? — 
They imbibed a love for the truths of the Keformation, stronger than 
death. Though separating from the corruptions of the English church, 
they retained, as precious, all its Evangelical articles of faith. They 
harmonized with Winthrop, in his Treatise on Christian charity: 
" That which the most in their churches (of England) maintain as 



truth in profession oulj, we must bring (where we go) into familiar 
and constant pi-actice." " The essential marks of the church," which 
they formed, were, as John Eobinson taught, " I'aith professed in 
word and deed, shewing the matter to be true ; and order in the holy 
things of God, shewing the form to be true." 

With regard to the doctrines now professed, Chalmers says, they 
" formed the seed plant of the churches of New England." That these 
Ecclesiastical bodies mainly harmonized in their religious principles, 
we have the statement of William Eathband in England, 104:4. They 
" are of one and the same way in church constitution, government and 
discipline, without any material difference, so that what may be truly 
said of any one of them, may be believed of them all." Though 
Thomas Weld in replying to his work differed from him in various 
points, he did not in the one, just recited. These remarks are placed 
here to show the pertinency of facts, which will be adduced, to the 
church at Salem as well as others of Massachusetts. 

Before John Cotton came hither in 1633, he wrote "God's promise to 
his plantation," published in London 1G30. In this he says to our set- 
tlers, "Have a care to be implanted into the ordinances, that the 
AVord may be ingrafted into you and you into it." AVhat he intended 
here is evidently brought out more particularly in his twelve articles 
of 1G40, " which maintained by any, the church may receive them and 
keep fellowship with them." The first of such a.rticles, is the doc- 
trine of the Trinity, which, like all the rest, is of the Calvinistic 
order. 

While writing of the Xew England churches in 1637, but one year af- 
ter the adoption by Salem Church of what the Sketch declares to be all 
that remains of its primitive confession and covenant, Kichard Bernard, 
a Puritan conformist of Batcombe in England, makes the ensuing 
statement. " They propound questions to be answered of such, as 
come to be admitted into their church fellowship, as about the God- 
head, the Trinity, their works, man's first estate in innocence, the 
fall, the redemption, Christ his nature, his offices, faith, the sacra- 
ments, the church, the resurrection and the last judgement." W^ith 
reference to such doctrines of the Eeformation, Samuel Danforth of 
Eoxbury in his sermon of 1671, considers for his subject, " the Eecog- 
nition of New England's errand into the Wilderness." Addressing 
himself to survivors of the primitive emigrants, he observes, your ob- 
ject in coming hither was " liberty to walk in the Faith of the Gospel 
with all good conscience according to the order of the Gospel, and your 



6 

enjoyment of the pure worship of God according to his institution, 
without human mixture and impositions. How diligent and faithful 
in preparing your hearts for the reception of the AVord "? How painful 
were you in recollecting, repeating and discoursing of what you heard, 
whetting the Word of God upon the hearts of your children, servants and 
neighbors? What searchings among the Holy Scriptures; what collations 
among your leaders ? What fervent zeal against all manner of heterodox- 
ies?" The religious principles, mentioned and alluded to by these authors, 
are neither embraced nor indicated by the Covenant of 1G3G, and, con- 
sequently, they must have been known and practiced, as a confession 
of faith, independently of such a covenant. What they so confidently 
tell us, is not invalidated, but strengthened, by the remarks preceding 
them. AVhile those make out a probability, these afford a certainty. 

Taking, then, the foregoing considerations together, what shall we 
say of them ? Do they contradict the position of the Volume, that the 
original confession and covenant of the Church in view, were seperate 
and distinct instruments ? No, they confirm it as true and worthy of 
all acceptation. 

II. Primitive history in relation to Salem Church. Among the va- 
rious accounts of gathering this body, the one given by Morton in his 
Memorial, p. 101-3, ed. 1721, is satisfactory and appropriate. He in- 
forms us that Messrs. Higginson and Skelton consulted with Governor 
Endicott "about settling a reformed congregation." There was a hearty 
concurrence on the part of the chief magistrate. " It was desired of Mr. 
Higginson to draw up a Confession of Faith and Covenant in Scripture 
language; which being done, was agreed upon. And because they 
foresaw, that this wilderness might be looked upon as a place of liberty 
and therefore might in time be troubled with erroneous spirits, there- 
fore, they did put one article into the Confession of Faith on purpose, 
about the duty and power of the magistrate in matters of Keligion. — 
Thirty copies of the foresaid Confession of Faith and Covenant being 
written out for the use of thirty persons, who were to begin the work. 
When the sixth of August came, it was kept as a day of Fasting and 
Prayer, in which after the Sermons and Prayers of the two ministers, 
in the end of the day, the foresaid Confession of Faith and Covenant 
being solemnly read, the foresaid persons did solemnly profess their 
consent thereunto. The Confession of Faith and Covenant forenamed 
was acknowledged only as a direction, pointing to the Faith and Covenant 
contained in the Holy Scriptures, and, therefore, no man was confined 
unto that form of words, but only to the substance, end and scope of 



the matter contained in them." As to "joining the church, some were 
admitted by expressing their consent to that written confession of 
faith and covenant ; others did answer to questions about the princi- 
ples of religion, that were publicly propounded to them, some did pre- 
sent their confessions in writing, which was read for them ; and some 
that were able and willing, did make their confession in their own 
words and way." This relation of Morton as explicitly and fully re- 
cognizes a confession of faith as it does a cOTenant. The making of 
the latter to swallow up the former, as some modern writex's have done, 
is a mistake. This is imitated by the Sketch, on page 5, where it 
represents the covenant of 1636, as comprising the first covenant and 
confession of Faith. To such a stand there are several objections. 

Morton informs us, that there was an article in the original confes- 
sion, "about the power and duty of magistrates in religion," probably 
suggested by the trouble with Lyford at Plymouth and with the 
Browns at Salem, which is no where found in the covenant, last named, 
though it has one, promising obedience to ministers and magistrates. 
Such lack of conformity proves, that the Covenant of 1636, does not 
contain, unless with a marked omission, the confession of 1629. It, 
therefore, breaks down the credibility, assumed by the Tract in behalf 
of what it considers, as its only remaining source of information, rela- 
tive to the original confession and covenant, and thus opens a door of 
uncertainty as to what was the whole confession, while it demonstrates 
that this instrument is not entirely included, even if a possibility ex- 
isted to prove that it was partly, by the covenant of 1636. 

The same author mentions a "form of words," in connection with the 
confession and covenent, as a rule for those, admitted to the church, 
and, though the candidates were permitted to own it by consent or re- 
plies to questions or written or oral language, they were required, in 
all this, to comply with " the substance, scope and end of the matter 
contained" in such a form. Substance and its two attendant terms de- 
pended on this form, as the definite standard of the doctrines, which 
they indicate. They absolutely needed such a rule so as not to be 
degraded from the vocabulary of intelligence to that of " sound 
and nothing else." However the "form of words" may have been 
represented as an empty shadow, it still remains, accompanied 
with its requisitions, as a fixed sign of all the scriptural principles, 
which it originally signified in the language of such men as Francis 
Higginson and Samuel Skelton. 

The account of Morton has the phrase, " the confession of faith and 



8 



covenent was acknowledged only as a direction,'^ binding no man ex- 
cept to the " substance" of such a scriptural form. This has always 
been in accordance with the spirit of the written creeds of evangelical, 
congregational churches. While rei^uiring candidates for admission to 
their privileges to harmonize in the substance of what they deemed 
the great doctrines, taught by the Gospel, they have never excluded 
any of them for diversity of opinion in non-essentials. So it was with 
the church, under John Higginson. He well knew the common ac- 
ceptation of the word, direction. He published his impression of it 
several years before he recommended the Memorial, which he, also, 
most probably supplied with its facts about the formation of his 
church. He, as we shall show, then used the term, direction, so as 
to comprise confession and covenent as two things, entirely separate 
from each other. 

An exegetical argument is offered by the Sketch, p. 12, 13, from 
certain words in Morton's relation, to shew that confession of faith and 
covenant were but one instrument, and that " a formula of faith distinct 
from the covenant was a thing unheard of in the formation of the early 
congregational churches of Kew England." We will look at the words 
italicised, on which these propositions are predicated. "Accordingly 
it was desired of Mr. Higginson to draw up a confession of faith and 
covenant which being done ^vas agreed upon." The Sketch would 
have us understand from these words that was being of the singular 
number and agreeing with which, must make this pronoun of the like 
number, and as which relates to confession of faith and covenent, these 
terms must signify but one idea and this idea must be covenant. But 
such a mode of interpretation seems to be unnatural and forced. Mur- 
ray, under his second rule of Syntax, remarks as follows. "It is evi- 
dently contrary to the first principles of grammar to consider two distinct 
ideas as one, however nice may be their shades ; and if there be no 
difference, one of them must be superfluous and ought to be rejected." 
It is plain that Morton was well acquainted with this principle. — 
Therefore, when he used confession of faith and covenant, two things 
essentially different in some particulars, he intended to convey by them 
two general, distinct ideas. He needed not be told that if both signi- 
fied but one such general idea, either confession of faith or covenant 
should be erased. It is also an undisputed rule and was so when 
Morton wrote, that "two nouns in the singular number, joined together 
by a copulative conjunction must have a pronoun agreeing with them in 
the plural number." Consequently, the which, if relating to confes- 



9 

sion of faith and covenant, must be plural, and, of course, must have 
its verb of the same number. 

Therefore, one of two inferences follows, either that loas, if agreeing 
■with which, as the relation to confession of faith and covenant, should 
be corrected and made ivere, and thus does not sanction the conclusion 
of the Tract, or, if not agreeing with which, so applied, must properly 
agree with it differently applied. The last of this dilemma is evidently 
the fact. To substantiate this proposition, the ensuing remarks are 
presented It is well known, that part of a sentence, logically consid- 
ered, may have all the privileges of Syntax, which belong to a noun of 
multitude. One example is given from Murray, "Promising without 
due consideration often produces a breach of promise." Consequently, 
part of a sentence is entitled, like such noun, to a relative of the singu- 
lar number. Applying these statements, let us take the phrase, "It 
was desired of Mr. Higginson to draw up a confession of faith and 
covenant in Scripture language." The action here is evidently the 
draft of a confession of faith and covenant. It is the gist of the sen- 
tence, and that portion of it, which may be properly considered as a 
noun, significant of more than one distinct thing, and, at the same 
time, entitled to a relative pronoun of the singular number. Of course, 
which, referring to such a portion of the sentence, may properly have 
the verb, was, agreeing with it and still leave confession of faith and 
covenant two separate instruments. So it is with the seccmd case, of- 
fered by the Sketch. " The confession of faith and covenant foremen- 
tioned was acknowledged only as a direction. " The part of this sen- 
tence to forementioned, was intended by Morton as a nominative singu- 
lar, though of plural signification, to loas, so that confession of faith 
and covenant should not be merged together, but understood as our 
fathers defined them. But does the Sketch object to such construing 
a part of a sentence ? If so, it falls under its own objection, though 
it has come to a different conclusion. It has rendered the phrase, 
" the confession of faith," indubitably a part of the sentence, as a noun 
singular and has added covenant to it and still retained the whole as 
of the same number. It w^ould be far more suitable to the genius of 
our language to understand the passages in question, as follows: — Con- 
fession or avowal of faith and of covenant, — so that was might agree 
with which as referring to confession or avowal, and in the next case, 
immediately with one or other of these last two words, — than to adopt 
the interpretation of the Sketch. 

Another expression, ''that written confession of faith and covenant," 
is indicated by the Sketch to signify but one instrument, because that, 



10 

being a singular demonstrative pronoun, and not repeated immediately 
before the word, covenant, makes this instrument of the same import as 
confession of faith. This is not justified by the use of our language, 
nor was it in the days of Morton. We frequently meet, in ancient as 
well as in modern publications, with phrases tantamount to the following : 
That man and woman were strangers to each other. Here are two indi- 
viduals of distinct identity, the latter having an ellipsis of that before 
her understood. If, allowing the Sketch to be right, we are reduced to 
the absurdity of declaring that these two persons are one and the same. 
But this cannot be in the nature of things. 

The preceding exegetical remarks leave us no other alternative, than 
either to trample on the proprieties of our language by complying with 
deductions from them, as drawn by the Sketch, or to coincide with 
such proprieties, and thus permit confession of faith and covenant to 
signify, as originally intended, the avowal of Gospel doctrines and of 
agreement to serve God in all relative duties, as two distinct services. 

From Morton we pass to the Covenant of IGoO. If this instrument 
be said to comprise what the founders of Xaumkeag church called 
a confession of faith, have we not a right to expect, that it will present 
us with the leading features of such a confession. If a contract to 
keep the laws of our Commonwealth be represented as containing these 
laws, are we not fully authorized to look for them in such a contract ? 
Most assuretlly. But we search that covenant in vain, for most of the 
religious principles which the founders of Salem heartily believed and 
counted above all earthly price ; and the small proportion of them 
found there, are only by implication, such as tally with the form of a 
covenant, but not with the form of a confession. We fully believe, 
that had those worthies known that the covenant of 1636 was to be 
expounded as embracing the principles of their creed, they would have 
strongly protested against it as a grievous wrong to their reputation 
as Christian Puritans. 

The Magnalia, while introducing the Covenant of 1636, voh i., p. 
66, ed. 1820, thus expresses itself. " They set apart the sixth day 
of August, for settling a Church state among them, and for their 
making a confession of their faith and entering into an holy covenant, 
whereby that Church state was formed." This language is very 
noticeable as to its plain import, that two distinct writings were in 
the mind of the author. Had there been only one, he could not have 
used words more directly and efficiently calculated to make a false 
impression on every reader of them. 

The relation goes on: " Now the Covenant, whereto these Christians 



11 

engaged themselves, which was about seven years after solemuly re- 
newed among them, I shall lay before all the churches of God, as it 
was then expressed and inforced." Here the question arises, to what 
date does this word, the7i, refer ? It more naturally and easily refers 
to 1G36, when the renewal took place, than otherwise. Consef{uently, 
in giving the transcript, ifather intended to be understood, as not 
•confining it to the exact phraseology and contents of the first covenant. 

Having recited the covenant, as the same author sets it before us, 
he adds: " By this instrument was the covenant of grace explained, 
received and recognized by the First Church in this Colony." Nor 
until he comes to describe the admission of members to the church, 
does he speak a single syllable about Confession. He thus refers to 
this and that, as two entirely separate concerns. Xor when the 
Church renewed their covenant, in 1636, did they so much as utter a 
lisp in their introduction to it, as though containing the least particle 
of their confession, but mentioned it as being nothing more than a 
covenant. 

In 1636, when the Salem covenant was renewed, we have the subse- 
quent extract from the Boston Church records. " Thomas Matson, 
formerly received by communion of churches, but now as a member 
upon confession of his faith and repentance, and professed subjection 
to the Lord Jesus Christ according to the covenant of the Gospel." 
Here confession of faith and covenant subjection were undoubtedly 
required as separate duties. From the fellowship between Boston and 
Salem churches we may legitimately conclude, that the like custom 
was in the latter as in the former. 

In 1637 many Puritan clergyman of England sent over thirty-two 
questions to the ministers of New England. Under the eighth ques- 
tion, they make the two subsequent inquiries. Do you require of 
those joining the church, " a public profession of their faith concerning 
the articles of Eeligion ? An express verbal covenanting to walk 
with the said church in particular, in church fellowship ? " Two years 
afterwards, these questions were answered by the ministers of our New 
England Colonies, through Kichard Mather. They say, we hear can- 
didates for admission to the church " speak concerning the gift and 
grace of justifying faith in their souls, and the manner of God with 
them in working it in their hearts ; we hear them speak what they do 
believe concerning the doctrine of faith. Hereby we would prevent 
the creeping in of any into the church, that may be infected with cor- 
rupt opinions ; " having done this and being approved, they " openly 
profess their subjection to the Gospel of Christ, and to all the ordi- 



12 

nances of God in that cliurch " with which they unite. AVe have here 
a plain indication and expression of what was done in Salem and the 
other churches of Massachusetts and vicinity. 

Any person may as rationally deny that day is not different from 
night, as to affirm, with such facts before him, compared with pro- 
ceedings in the formation of the First Salem Church, that this church 
had no primitive articles of belief, required of its candidates for ad- 
mission, separate from its covenant, as expressed in 1G36. 

As a matter of past practice and public notoriety, Lechford in his 
"News from New England," under 1039, but three years after the 
Covenant of 163iJ, described the manner of admitting members to our 
churches. Testimonials and recommendations were required of them. 
They related their Christian experience. " The party having finished 
his discourses of his confession and profession of his faith," the Ruling 
Elder then called the brethren to vote whether they felt ready to 
accept him as a member. So it was with other candidates. In case 
they were approved of, " the Ekler calleth them and rehearse th the 
covenant, on their parts, to them, which they publicly say, they do 
promise, by the help of God, to perform. And then the Elder, in the 
name of the Church, promiseth the Churches part of the covenant, to 
the new admitted members." 

Thomas Weld replied to William Eathband in 1044. The latter 
had remarked of our fathers, " They permit no man whatsoever to be 
a member in any of their churches, to partake with them in any 
church fellowship, unless he exactly enter in their way of entering, 
and walk in their order." The former answered, "It is no more than 
all other societies in the world do, who first require conformity before 
they permit to any the enjoyment of their liberties." Eathband re- 
lated the procedure of our churches with candidates for admission, 
before entering into covenant, which then, as now, was the last requi- 
sition. He said that such candidates must have recommendation from 
acquaintances, present and absent ; give a particular relation of their 
religious experience, and be examined " touching their knowledge in 
the principles of religion." In connection with this he quoted a letter 
from this country: "The churches here admit none but upon confes- 
sion of their faith." His language was understood by Weld as if 
every individual candidate was required to do all these things in pub- 
lic, and therefore Weld mentioned an exception : " We have seen such 
a tender respect had to the weaker sex, who are usually more fearful 
and bashful, that we commit their trial to the elders and some few 
others, in private, who upon their testimony, are admitted into the 
church." 



13 

Rathband, after dwelling on the tjualifications of church member- 
ship, and making one of them to be confession of faith, as absolutely 
essential, came down to the covenant, which he represented as the 
same in exacting duties of fellowship, but " in form of words, diverse 
in divers churches." In replying to him. Weld observed, " Any 
church hath and taketh liberty, as they shall see just cause to alter it 
(their covenant) and renew it before the Lord, and bind not themselves 
to continue in any oversight because they once fell into it, and some 
churches hav so done." 

Cotton, in his " Way of the Churches" in New England of 16-i5, 
made the following statements. They who wish to join the church, 
mention it to the elders, " who take trial of their knowledge in the 
principles of religion, and of their experience in the ways of grace, and 
of their godly conversation amongst men, that if found ignorant, such 
may not be presently presented to the church." If approved, " they 
are propounded by one of the ruling elders of the church." If no 
exceptions be made, they are called forth before the church, and each 
one maketh confession of his sins and profession of his faith." Pro- 
vided all appears right, the brethren express their approbation by lift- 
ing up their hands. After this, " the elder propoundeth to them the 
heads of the covenant." The candidates " acknowledging this to be 
their duty and professing their consent unto it, in the name of Christ ; 
the elder doth further acquaint them with what duties of holy watch- 
fulness over them, they may expect from the church ; and so shutteth 
up his work with some short prayer unto the Lord." Cotton remarked, 
" The Lord Jesus maketh the profession of the faith of his name to be 
the rock, on which his visible church is built. Then we shall build a 
church without a foundation, if we receive such members, as do not 
hold forth such a profession. Doth not Christ impute it to the sleepi- 
ness, that is, to the remissness and negligence, of his servants, that 
tares were sown in his field amongst the wheat? " 

Cotton said, in his " Way of Congregational churches cleared," 
printed in London, 1648, " We profess the Orthodox doctrine of faith, 
the same with all Protestant churches." 

As bearing on the like subject, and affording similar proof, we may 
quote from the preface to the Platform, adopted by the New England 
Synod of 1648. " Being called upon by our godly magistrates to draw 
up a public confession of faith, which is constantly taught and gene- 
rally professed amongst us ; we thought good to present unto them, 
and with them to our churches, and with them to all the churches of 
Christ abroad, our professed and hearty assent and attestation to the 



u 

whole confession of faith (for substance of doctrine) which the reverend 
Assembly presented to the religious and honorable Parliament of 
England." 

In his epistle, dedicatory to his Orthodox Evangelist, which he wrote 
to his parishioners of Ipswich, 1G52, John Norton made the following re- 
marks : " Wliat hath my soul longed or labored for more than that you 
should be not only babes, but men, both sound and strong in faith; sin- 
cere and distinct, that Christ might not only be formed but perfected ; 
that you might not only have a saving but satisfactory knowledge of 
Lim, in whom you believe. The end of the Gospel is to be known, the 
duty and disposition of the believer, is to know." How he had thus dis- 
charged his duty to the people of Ipswich from 1636, may be learned 
from the priucij^les of divinity taught and illustrated in the aforesaid 
work. 

In his election sermon of 1603, John Higginson observed that the 
design of the primitive settlers was " the avoiding of some special cor- 
ruptions, and the vigorous profession and practice of everything in 
doctrines, worship and discipline, according to Scripture pattern." — 
After other similar observations, he added, "Hence I humbly conceive, 
that the consent cf the Synod here to the confession of Faith by the 
Assembly of Westminster, and the platform of discipline published in 
the year 1649, these for the substance of them, have carried with 
them a declaration of the Faith and order of these churches, and are 
so looked upon by the reformed Churches abroad, unto which may be 
added many other books of our divines of the same import." 

William Stoughton, in his sermon of 1670, called " New England's 
true interest," spoke of what its founders practiced, as " practical piety 
and holiness ; unmixed, spiritual. Gospel worship ; sincere and open 
profession and owning of the truths and ways of Christ." In his ad- 
dress to survivors of the first generation, he observed, " as long as you 
are in this tabernacle, stir them up by putting them in remembrance, 
that they may be established in all those truths and practices, which 
to own and abide in hath been New England's glory and must be its 
preservation and safety in whatever times are coming upon us." 

In the preface to the Eesult of the Synod, assembled in Boston 1679, 
and written by Increase Mather, he remarked, that the churches " own 
both the faith and order of the Gospel, that was professed in the 
days of our fathers." As the same divine wrote the Eesult, he shows 
therein what he meant by such owning of the faith, as follows, " It is 
requisite that persons be not admitted unto communion in the Lord's 



15 

supper without making a personal and public profession of their faith 
and repentance." He afterwards spoke of renewing the covenant as a 
long known custom, very distinct from the profession or confession of 
faith. 

As to the manner in which the Salem church was gathered, Hub- 
bard wrote, by 1G82, " Mr. Higginson drew up a confession of faith and 
form of a church covenant, " language which must be exceedingly di- 
verted from its natural import to signify but one solitary document. 

"We have thus followed the teachings of history. They evidently and 
fully show, that there was a marked distinction made in the 
Salem and other primitive churches, between a profession or 
confession of faith and taking the covenant, and that these were ser- 
vices not mixed up together, but required and performed at different 
times. But in the covenant, renewed in 1G36, we perceive no pro- 
vision of doctrines to meet such an established practice, and therefore, 
we cannot, consistently with the ecclesiastical usage of our first settlers, 
allow, that it comprises a confession of faith in addition to its own ap- 
propriate requisitions. Such historical instructions are absolutely at 
variance with the Sketch, which maintains that the confession and 
covenant " were one and the same instrument." Applying them 
to the Book, do they contradict its statements, as called in question 
by this Tract ? Candor and truth legitimately exercised, cannot re- 
ply in the affirmative. 

HI. Proceedings of the First Salem Church. The records of this 
body, as they are now extant, have quotations from a preceding book, 
not to be found, from 1G3G to 1G59. There is no original transcript 
of the first confession and covenant known to be in existence. Even 
the list of the church members has no earlier a date, than the former 
of these two years, before any of them, though some were among the 
first professors. Of the thirty names, cited on 11 th page of the Sketch, 
but a small proportion were of the primitive members. The earliest 
ecclesiastical document of the present records is what the Magnalia 
contains and calls the covenant, as renewed in 1636, except an intro- 
duction to it of this date and an additional clause of 1660. — 
Consequently, the present church records cannot furnish uudoubted 
and full proof of what the founders of Salem had exactly for their 
original confession and covenant. They have not a single item to 
substantiate the position, that the latter of these documents embraced 
the former. The introduction to the covenant, which they have, 
says, " We renew that church covenant, we find this Church bound unto 



16 

at their first beginning." It utters not a syllable in reference to the 
confession. The principal word, on which the question turns, inde- 
pendently of other sources, whether this covenant is the same as the 
first, "word for word and letter for letter," 'm renew. This term evident- 
ly means, from its connection, " to put again into act." Therefore, the 
renewal of the covenant was for the members to repeat the act, it re- 
quired, of obligating themselves to serve God faithfully in all their 
personal and relative duties. This could then and on all similar occa- 
sions afterwards, be properly done, and yet leave room for such 
omissions, alterations and additions in the covenant, as comported with 
so sacred a duty and as were expedient for different periods, events 
and circumstances. This is confirmed by the statement of JTr. Weld 
on p. 13. Hence, the brethren in 1G3G, virtually said, we do renew 
the original covenant, or repeat the act of binding ourselves to do 
the good pleasure of God in all our relations, as that covenant obligated 
its primitive observers. Their renewal did not hold them to perpetu- 
ate and approve every letter, word and sentence of such a document, 
any further than they agreed it should in compliance with their difi"er- 
ent situation, though, at the same time, it did hold them to the moral 
obligation, as already expressed. It is similar to the repairing or re- 
newing of Church edifices. These may be centuries old and yet, while 
allowed to stand as the resorts of holy service, we always assign to 
them their ancient age, though they may have been altered in form and 
enlarged in dimensions, with every successive assembly, who have wor- 
shipped within their walls. It is like the corporate identity of a 
church composed of members, who die ofi" for generations, but it is still 
traced to its original formation and receives its primitive rank according- 
ly. Or, to take things less material, it resembles a law or constitution 
of a State, which until absolutely repealed, bear their original dates, 
though when amended or renewed, they have been subjected to various 
changes. The ground, here taken, will be confirmed by subsequent 
facts. 

On one side of the covenant, as recited by Mather, and contained in 
the church records, whence this author received it directly or indi- 
rectly, is the succeeding marginal note, penned by Samuel I'isk, who 
was ordained in 1718. " 6 of Cth month, 1G29. This covenant was 
publicly signed and declared, as may appear from page 85, in this 
book." The instrument, thus noticed, has an introduction and an 
addition, which could not possibly have been with the covenant, as 
owned in the beginning. Therefore, Mr. Fisk's written testimony 



17 

adds force to the position, that it was common to speak of such a con- 
tract, as the first one, though preceded and succeeded by what was 
not of its primitive contents. 

But the note of Mr. Fisk is particularly interesting from its refer- 
ence to the 85th page. Here we are met with the following transcript. 
1665, Oct. 5. " The Pastor did then also acquaint the Church with the 
writing he had formerly mentioned and read unto them, as a help to 
reduce the doctrine of the Synod into practice, it being a Direction for 
a public profession after private examination by the Elders, which 
Direction is taken out of the Scripture, and points to the Faith and 
Covenant contained in the Scripture, it being the same for substance 
propounded to and agreed upon by the Church of Salem at their first 
beginning, the sixth of the sixth month, 1629, it being now printed, 
any that desired it, should have one of them for their use." Here we 
have a rare production from the pen of John Higginson, introduced 
to our notice. It refers to a Synod of Massachusetts of 1662. This 
body are well known to have assembled, and acted on the half-way 
covenant and the consociation of churches. Their churches still re- 
tained the articles of faith, professed by the Westminster Assembly, 
and adopted by them in 1648, as the standard for admission to their 
fellowship. In their answer to questions, as desired by the Cieneral 
Court, they observed, that " such church members, who are admitted 
in minority, understanding the doctrine of faith, and publicly pro- 
fessing their assent thereunto, not scandalous in life, and solemnly 
owning the covenant before the church," may have their children bap- 
tized. Here the Synod, whose proposals Mr. Higginson wished to 
have carried out among his people, as others of like tenor had been 
from the beginning, as his declaration is on p. 14, made it necessary 
even for such as owned the half-way covenant, to comprehend " the 
doctrine of faith," as evidently taught by the AVestminster Catechism, 
and publicly acknowledge it, and then to own such a covenant, so that 
they might be received into membership, though not full communion. 
If so much was demanded of these persons, assuredly less could not 
consistently have been from those admitted to fuller privileges. Here 
two things are demonstrated. One, that articles of religion were first re- 
quired to be publicly confessed, and another, that a covenant was after- 
wards alike acknowledged as conditions of communion, and, of course, 
the former and latter of the two first of these duties were not dis- 
charged together, but separately. 

In the same extract from the 85th page of the Church records, we 
S 



18 

read, " Faith and Covenant." This phrase was used by Mr. Higgin- 
son. He did not mean by it, as proved by his Direction, that Faith 
and Covenant were one and the same, but two instruments entirely 
separate. His signification of it was conclusive authority, as pre- 
viously stated, for Morton's Memorial, recommended by Higginson 
four years after the latter published such a phrase. What shall we 
say, then, of the interpretation put by the action of the Synod and 
Mr. Higginson, u^wn the expression, "Faith and Covenant " ? Such 
interpretation was laid before the whole country prior to the emission 
of the Memorial, which is not only destitute of any conclusive argu- 
ment against it, but furnishes positive material in its favor. Most 
certainly, it is point blank against the conclusions of the Sketch. 

Here the question offers itself, "What does the Direction,* carefully, 
earnestly and sincerely urged by the pastor on his church, — contain ? 
After various and appropriate quotations from the Bible, one of them 
being, '* Hold fast the form of sound words," it presents a Confession 
of Faith, which begins and proceeds in the following language : 

" I do believe with my heart, and confess with my mouth, concern, 
ing God, that there is but one only true God in three persons, the 
Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost ; each of them God, and all of 
them one and the same infinite, eternal God, most wise, holy, just, 
merciful and blessed forever." 

Then the Confession goes on with similar particularity, as to six 
other subjects, namely: The "Works of God; The Fall of Man ; Jesys 
Christ ; The Holy Ghost ; Benefits through Christ ; and the Christian 
Church. After setting before us these things, the Direction narrates 
the Covenant, much shorter than that drawn up by Peters, and then, 
" Questions to be answered at the baptizing of children." 

Such a direction was no hasty effusion. It was from the mind, 
heart and hand of Higginson, who well knew what he affirmed. He 
had personal experience of all he declared on this subject. He was 
the original source of all the authority adduced by the Sketch, to sus- 
tain a theory totally at variance with his own. He was among the 
survivors, of whom Hubbard said, while describing, among other 
things, a transcript of the primitive confession and covenant, " a copy 
of which is retained at this day by some, that succeeded in the same 
church." Higginson, in preparing the Direction, would be much more 
likely to imitate the main features of what his father drew up, than 
those by any other hand. Under these circumstances, he declared, 
* See Appendix (A.) 



19 

that the Direction was " the same for substance" as agreed upon by 
the Church in 1629. Compare it with the Covenant of 1030. We 
cannot, if permitting reason to make a fit use of the testimony before 
us, do otherwise than conclude, that there is an incontrovertible differ- 
ence between them ; that if Higginson be correct, they are far from 
being one and the same thing ; that the covenant of the Direction has 
but little resemblance to the covenant accepted by the church under 
Peters ; that this last instrument by no means comprises the confes- 
sion of the Direction ; and that, as the confession and covenant of the 
Direction are substantially those of 1629, these two original instru- 
ments cannot, with any propriety of sound speech, be called the same 
as the covenant of 16o6. 

We will now turn to the proceedings of the church in 1680. This 
year another pamphlet* was prepared for their use. It is plainly 
from the hand of John Higginson, ever vigilant for the prosperity of 
his flock. It commences with the two succeeding statements. " There 
was a church covenant agreed upon and consented to by the church of 
Salem at their first beginning in the year 1629, Aug. 6." — " This fol- 
lowing covenant was propounded by the Pastor, agreed upon and con- 
sented to by the Brethren of the Church in the year 1636." Then 
the latter covenant, with its introduction, is recited literally, as it was 
inserted, without such introduction, in Cotton Mather's Magnalia, a 
work recommended by Higginson seventeen years from the date of the 
pamphlet. There is not so much as an allusion either to the first or 
last of these two instruments as including a confession of faith, nor is 
the word confession used in any connection with them. The whole 
phraseology shows, that covenants alone were before the mind of him, 
who spoke of them. Such a fact is no proof that there was not a dis- 
tinct confession, because the pamphlet of 1665 and other credible 
authorities have placed this question beyond all rational dispute. 
This conclusion is strengthened by the quotation of the Sketch, pp. 7, 
8, as to individuals who joined the church in 1678, " they making 
their profession of faith and repentance," and were then admitted, 
" they engaging in the covenant." Nor has the mode of such pro- 
fession or confession, as related by the quotation, any essential force 
to break down the position, that the church had " a form of words," 
as Morton relates, to regulate the confession so that it should not 
deny the leading principles of the Gospel, as understood and declared 
by John Higginson and his brethren. 

* See Appendix (B.) 



20 

The pamphlet next remarks, " This forementioned covenant (of 
IGoG) was often read and renewed by the church at the end of days 
of humiliation, especially in the year 1660," when a clause was added, 
" to beware of the leaven of the doctrine of the Quakers." It then 
informs us, that the church adopt another covenant, " as a direction 
for the renewing of our church covenant," which was first used April 
15, 1680. Such a covenant varies much from that of 1636, and, of 
course, the first time it was used, it could not be a renewal of its pre- 
ceding covenant in all its words and sentences, but only of the moral 
obligation of the members to serve God in all their relations, and of 
the language and parts of this preceding covenant as were needed to 
express such an obligation. Therefore we have another confirmation, 
that the renewal of the covenant in 1636, did not necessarily imply, 
that such an instrument was the same in all respects as that of 1629, 
This conclusion is confirmed by the phraseology of the two foregoing 
statements, compared with each other, which fully indicate all the 
diversity here implied. 

The Statements and the Direction, as illustrating each other and 
the confessions of faith and covenants, appertaining to the First 
Church of Salem, constitute an indubitable argument, sufiicient to 
confirm the positions of the Volume, and clear it from the charges of 
the Sketch. 

Before we close, it may not be amiss to notice the implied surprise 
of the Tract, pp. 5, 6, that the volume failed to recite, at length, the 
covenant of 1636. But, in view of the previous reasons, why such 
an instrument should not be quoted by a historical work, as " the 
true original of the confession and covenant of 1629," there can be no 
Teasonable wonder why it was omitted. The manner in which such 
surprise is manifested seems to denote that every history of New Eng- 
land, down to the time of Dr. Bentley's remarks, contained a trans- 
script of this instrument. If recollecting aright, no other history of 
our country contained it except the Magnalia, and this in terms by no 
means sufficient to allow the latitude taken with it by the Sketch. It 
is true, that the covenant of 1 636 was quoted by William Eathband 
in his work of 1644, with another, adopted by the Church of Rotter- 
dam, when Hugh Peters became their pastor and before his settle- 
ment at Salem. As recited by Hanbury, these two documents exhibit 
a style and similar expressions which denote that they may have been 
drawn up by Peters himself. Whether this be so or not, Eathband 
adduces the Salem covenant of 1636, without a single intimation that 



21 

it was the one of 1629. He criticizes some of its passages, as to 
prophecy and questions in time of public worship, which were not so 
likely to exist in the church at the time of its being formed as after- 
wards, and thus intimate themselves to be additions and not original 
insertions. 

Looking to these and other considerations of the third head, the 
Book has not only a civil, but also a moral right to receive the service 
of the Eoman orator in a brief speech, as one exemplifying its own 
course and quoted by the Tract: "The historian should never dare 
utter what is false, or suppress anything that is true, and must 
always keep his mind above prejudice or partiality." 



APPENDIX. 



(A.) 

A 



DIRECTION 

FOR 

A PUBLICK PROFESSION 

in the CHURCH ASSEMBLY, after private Examination by the 
ELDERS. 

Which Direction is taken out of the Scripture, and Points unto that Faith 
and Covenant contained in the Scripture. 

Being the same for Substance which was propounded to, and agreed upon 

by the Church of Salem at tlieir bejzinning, the 

sixth of the sixth Moneth, 1629. 

In the Preface to the Declaration of the Faith owned and professed hy 
the Congregational Churches in England.* 

The Genuine use of a Confession of Faith is, that under the same Form of 
Words they express the substance of the same common Salvation or unity 
of their Faith. Accordingly it is to be looked upon as a fit meanes, whereby 
to express that their Common Faith and Salvation, and not to be made use 
of as an imposition upon any. 

* These two lines, being separated from the quotation, to which they are an. 
introduction, led the writer into the mistake of supposing that the Direction, 
though referring immediately to the Salem Church, was published by the Savoy 
Synod. But the quotation from the eighty-fifth page of this Church's records 
decides that the Direction was from the hand of John Higginson, and printed 
under his supervision. The error, with a right application of the facts in this 
work, was published in the second edition of the Annals of Salem. 1 v., 126 p., 
and 2 v., 567 p. The Direction was seen by the writer more than twenty years 
ago, in the Boston Athenseum, among the extensive collection made by the late 
William S. Shaw, Esq. 



24 

We beseech you Brethren to know them that labour among you, and are 
over you in the Lord, and admonish you to esteem them very highly in love 
for their work sake, and be at peace among yourselves. 1 Thess. 5, 12, 13. 

Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit your selves, for they 
watch for your soules, as they 7nust give an account, that they may do it xvith 
joy and not with grief, for that is unprof table for you. Heb. 13, 17. 

Who is that wise and faithfull steivard, whom his Lord shall make Ruler 
over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season. Luke 
12, 42. 

One Faith, one Baptism. Eph. 4, 5. 

The Common Faith. Tit. 1, 4. 

The common Salvation. Jude Ver. 3. 

Christ Jesus, the high priest of our Profession. Heb. 3, 1. 

The profession of our Faith. Heb. 10, 23. 

One shall say I am the Lords. Isai. 44, 5. 

Holdfast the form of sound words. 2 Tim. 1, 13. 
The form of Knowledge and of the truth. Rom. 2, 20. 
The form of Doctrine delivered unto you. Rom. 6, 17. 



THE CONFESSIOX OF FAITH. 
I do believe with my heart and confess with my mouth, 
Concerning God. 
That there is but one only true God in three persons, the Father, the 
Son, and the Holy Ghost, each of them God, and all of tliemoneand the same 
Infinite, Eternal! God, most Wise, Holy, Just, Mercifull and Blessed for- 
ever. 

Concerning the Works of God. 
That this God is the INIaker, Preserver, and Governour of all things 
according to the counsel of his own Will, and that God made man in his 
own Image, in Knowledge, Holiness, and Righteousness. 

Concerning the fall of Man. 
That Adam, by transgressing the Command of God, fell from God and 
bj-ought himself and his posterity into a state of sin and death, under the 
Wrath and Curse of God, which I do believe to be my own condition by 
nature as well as any other. 

Concerning Jesus Christ. 
That God sent his Son into the World, who for our sakes became man, 
that he might redeem and save us by his Obedience unto death, and that he 
arose from the dead, ascended unto Heaven and sitteth at the right hand of 
God, from whence he shall come to judge the World. 

Concerning the Holy Ghost. 

That God the Holy Ghost hath fully revealed the Doctrine of Christ and 
will of God in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, which are 
the AVord of God, the perfect, perpetuall and only Rule of our Faith and 
Obedience. 

Concerning the benefits ice have by Christ. 

That the same Spirit, by Working Faith in God's Elect, applyeth unto 
them Christ with all his Benefits of justification and sanctification, unto Sal- 
vation, in the use of those Ordinances which God hath appointed in his 
written word, which therefore ought to be observed by us until the coming 
of Christ. 



25 

Concerning the Church of Christ. 
That all true Believers being united unto Christ as the Head, make up 
one Misticall Churth, -which is the Body of Christ, the members whereof 
having fellowship with the Father, Son and Holy Ghost by Faith, and one 
with another in love, doe receive here upon earth forgiveness of Sinnes, with 
the life of Grace, and at the Resurrectioa of the Body they shall receive 
everlasting life. Amen. 



THE COVENANT. 

I do heartily take and avouch this one God who is made known to us in 
the Scripture, by the Name of God the Father, and God the Son, even 
Jesus Christ, and God the Holy Ghost to be my God, according to the ten- 
our of the Covenant of Grace ; wherein he hath promised to be a God to 
the Faithfull and their seed after them in their Generations, and taketh 
them to be his People, and therefore unfeignedly repenting of all my sins, 
I do give up myselt wholy unto this God, to believe in, love, serve and obey 
him sincerely and faithfully according to his written word, against all the 
temptations of the Devil, the World, and my own flesh, and this unto the 
death. 

I do also consent to be a member of this particular Church, promising to con- 
tinue steadfastly in fellowship with it, in the pnblick wot^ship of God, to 
submit to the Order, Discipline and Government of Christ in it, and to the 
Ministerial teaching, guidance and oversight of the Elders of it, and to the 
brotherly watch of Fellow Members ; and all this according to God's Word, 
and by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ enabling me thereunto. A ME N. 



Questions to be Answered at the Baptizing of Children, or the 
substance to be expressed by the Parents. 

Quest. Doe you jwesent and fjive up this child, or these children, unto 
God the Father, Sonne and Holy Ghost, to be baptized in the Faith, and en- 
gaged in the Covenant of God professed by this Church f 

Quest. Doe you Sollemrdy Promise in the presence of God, that by the 
grace of Christ, you will discharge your Covenant duly towards your chil- 
dren, soe as to bring them up in the Nurture and Admonition of the Lord, 
teaching and commanding them to keep the way of God, that they may be 
able (through the grace of Christ) to make a personall profession of their 
Faith and to own the Covenant oj God themselves in due time. 

FINIS. 



26 



(B.) 

There was a Cliurcli Covenant agreed upon and consented to by the Church 

of Salem at their first beginning in the year, 1629, Aug. 6. 
The /allowing Covenant icas propounded by the Pastor, agreed upon and 

consented to by the Brethren of the Church, in the year, 1636. 
Gather my Saints unto me that have made a Covenant tvith me by Sacrifice, 

Psal, 50. 5. 

We whose Names are underwritten, Members of the present Church of 
Christ in Salem, having found by sad experience how dangerous it is to sit 
loose from the Covenant we make with our God, and how apt we are to 
•wander into by paths, even to the losing of our first aims in entring into 
Church Fellowship ; Do therefore solemnly in the presence of the Eternal 
God, both for our own comforts, and those who shall or may be joyned unto 
us, renew that Church Covenant we find this Church bound unto at their 
first beginning, viz. That we covenant with the Lord, antl one with another, 
doe bind our selves in the presence of God to walk together in all his wayes, 
according as he is pleased to reveal himself unto us in his blessed word of 
truth, and do more explicitly in the name and fear of God, profess and pro- 
test to walk as followeth, through the power and grace of our Lord Jesus 
Christ. 

We avouch the Lord to be our God, and our selves to be his people, in 
the truth and simplicity of our spirits. 

We give ourselves to the Lord Jesus Christ; and the word of his grace, 
for the teaching, ruling and sanctifying of us in matters of worship and con- 
versation, resolving to cleave to him alone for life and glory, and to oppose 
all contrary wayes. Cannons and constitutions of men in his worship. 

We promise to walk with our Brethren and Sisters with all watchfulness, 
and tenderness, avoiding jealousies and suspitions, backbitings, <;ensurings, 
provokings, secret risings of spirit against them ; but in all offences, to follow 
the rule of the Lord Jesus, and to bear and forbear, give and forgive as he 
hath taught us. 

In publick or private we will willingly doe nothing to the offence of the 
Church ; but Avill be willing to take advice for our selves and ours, as occa- 
sion shall be presented. 

We will not in the Congregation be forward either to shew our own gifts 
and parts, in speaking and scrupling or there discover the weaknesses and 
failings of our Brethren, but attend an orderly call thereunto, knowing how 
much the Lord may be dishonored, and his Gospel & the profession of it 
slighted by our distempers and weaknesses in publick. 

We bind ourselves to study the advancem.ent of the Gospel in all truth 
and peace both in regard of those that are within or without, no way slighting 
our Sister Churches, but using their council as need shall be, not laying a 
stumbling block before any, no not the Indians, whose good we desire to 
promote, and so to converse as we may avoid the very appearance of evil. 

We doe hereby promise to carry our selves in all lawful obedience to those 
that are over us in Church or Commonwealth, knowing how well and pleas- 
\n(f it will be to the Lord that they should have encouragement iu their 
places, by not grieving their spirits through our irregularityes. 

We resolve to approve our selves to the Lord in our particular Callings, 
shunning idleness as the bane of any State, nor will we deal hardly or op- 
pressingly with any wherein we are the Lords Stewards. 

Also promising to our best ability to teach our Children and Servants the 
knowledge of God and his will, that they serve him also; and all this not by 
any strength of our own, but by the Lord Christ, whose blood we desire may 
sprinkle this our Covenant made in his Name. 



27 

This foremendoned Covenant ivas often read and Renewed hy the Church 
at the end of days of Humiliation, especially in the year 1G60, on the sixth of 
the first jnoneth ; tvhen also considering the hour of Temptation amongst us by 
reason of the Quakers Doctrine, to the lecening of some in the place ivhere we 
are, and endangering of others, loe doe see cause to remember the admonition 
of our Saviour Christ unto his disciples, Math. 16. Take heed and beware 
of the leveii of the doctrine of the Pharisees. And doe judge it (so far as 
we understand it) that the Quakers doctrine is as bad or worse than that of 
the Pharise es. Therefore, 

We doe Covenant by the help of Jesus Christ, to take heed and beware 
of the leven of the doctrine of the Quakers. 

Also this following Covenant was in several Church Meetings in the begin- 
ning of this year 1680, considered of agreed upon, and consented to by the 
generality of the Church, to be used as a direction for the Renewing of our 
Church Covenant, as being more accommodated to the present times, and state 
of things amongst us. 

Accordingly it teas made use of in that way at the conclusion of the puhlick 
Fast, April 15, 1680. viz. 

We, who (through the mercy of God) are Members of this Church of 
Salem, being now assembled in the presence of God, and in the Name of our 
Lord Jesus Christ, after humble confession of our manifold breaches of Cov- 
enant with the Lord our God, and earnest supplication for his pai'doning 
mercy through the blood of Christ and deep acknowledgement of our own 
unworthiness to be owned as the Lords Covenant People ; also acknowledg- 
ing our inability to keep Covenant with God, or to perform any spiritual 
duty unless the Lord enable us thereunto by the Grace of his Spirit, and yet 
being awfully sensible that in these times by the loud voice of his judgements 
both felt and feared, the Lord is calling us all to Repentance and Reforma- 
tion ; we doe therefore in humble confidence of his gracious assistance, 
through Christ, Renew our Covenant with God, and one with another in the 
manner following. 

1. We doe give up our selves to that God whose name alone is Jehovah, 
Father, Son and Spirit, as the only true and living God, and unto our Lord 
Jesus Christ, as our only Redeemer and Saviour, as the only Prophet, Priest & 
King over our Souls, and only Mediator of the Covenant of Grace, engaging 
our hearts unto this God in Christ by the help of his Spirit of Grace to 
cleave unto him as our God and chief good, and unto Jesus Christ as our 
Mediator by Faith, in a way of Gospel Obedience, as becometh his Covenant 
People for ever. 

2. We doe also give up our Offspring unto God in Jesus Christ, avouching 
the Lord to be our God and the God of our Children, and our selves, with our 
Children lo be his People, humbly adoring the Grace of God in Christ Jesus, 
that we & our Children may be looked upon as the Lords. 

3. We do also give up ourselves one to another in the Lord according 
to the will of God, to walk together as a Church of Christ in all the wayes of 
his worsliip and service, according to the Rules of the Word of God, promis- 
ing in brotherly love faithfully to watch over one another's Souls, and to sub- 
mit our selves to the discipline and government of Christ in his Church, and 
duly to attend the Seals and Censures, and whatever Ordinances Christ 
hath commanded to be observed by his people according to the order of the 
Gospel, so far as the Lord hath, or shall reveal unto us. 

And whereas the Elders and Messengers of these churches have met to- 
gether in the late Synod to inquire into the Reasons of the Lord's Contro- 
versy with his people, have taken notice of many provoking Evils as the pro- 
curing causes of the Judgements of God upon New-England, so far as we or 



28 

any of us have been guilty of those Evils, or any of them, (according to any 
light held forth by them from Scripture) we desire from our hearts to bewail 
it before the Lord; and numbly to entreat for paidoning merty for the sake 
of the blood of the everlasting Covenant. And as an expedient unto Refor- 
mation of those Evils, or whatever else have provoked the Eyes of God's 
glory amongst us, we do promise and engage our selves in the presence 
of God. 

1. That we will (by the help of Christ) endeavour every one to reform 
his own heart and life, by seeking to mortify all our sins and to walk more 
close with God than ever we have done, and to uphold the power of godli- 
ness, and that we will continue to worship God, in public, private and secret, 
and this (as God shall help us) Avithont formality and hypocrasie, and more 
fully and faithfully then heretofore, to discharge all Covenant duties one to- 
wards another in a way of Church Communion. 

2. We promise by the help of Christ, to reform our Families, and to 
walk before God in our houses with a perfect heart, and that we will uphold 
the Worship of God therein continually, as he in his Word doth require both 
in respect of prayer, and reading of the Scriptures, that we will do what lyes 
in us to bring up our Children lor God, and therefore will (so far as there 
shall be need of it) Catechize them, and exhort and charge them to fear 
and serve the Lord, and endeavour to set an holy Example before them, and 
be much in j)rayer for their Conversion and Salvation. 

3. We do further engage (the Lord helping of us) to endeavour to keep 
our selves pure from the sins of the Times, and what lyes in us to help for- 
ward the lleformation of the same in the ])laces where we live, denying all 
ungodliness and worldly lusts, living soberly, righteously, and godly in this 
present world, making Conscience to walk so as to give no offence nor to 
give occasion toothers to sin or to speak evil of our holy Profession. 

Finally, giving glory to the Lord our God, that He is the faithful God, 
keeping Covenant and mercy with his people for ever, but confessing that 
we are a weak and sinful people, and subject many wayes to break our 
Covenant with him ; therefore that we may observe and keep these and all 
other Covenant duties required of us in the word of God ; We desire to deny 
our selves, and to depend wholly upon the grace of God in Christ Jesus for 
the constant presence and assistance of his holy spirit to enable us thereunto, 
and wherein we shall fail, we shall humbly wait upon his grace in Christ for 
pardon, for Acceptance, and for healing, for his Name's sake. Amen. 

FINIS. 



PD 1.8 IJ 









<^ ^^ 






c° / 



.*«^ 



■■^.s .^^' 















k 



-yiW^' 



-v 





.-^' 



.^^ 






^^ 



A. 







..;;«^. .V «- -.f."?.' . 



/. 



r^Qi 




bv^ 









% 



<. 






c'c^:55^v^^ 




VC 



OOBBSBROS. ^«? «j^ "."(^Si^u 'i> 

UBRARY BINDING ^^^ ^ • ($ ^ * -^ 



ST. AUGUSTINE - 
^^^ FLA. ' 





* .N^ 



V 



-5" 



